Mystique + Wong Shouldn't Work

[SuitUpHewgz]

Wong's effect says On Reveal happens TWICE, it does NOT say 'an additional time,' nor does it say something to the effect of 'On Reveal happens twice AS MANY times.'

If it's intended, then that's fine, that's a cool thing to learn, but as a card problem-solving-text experience, it feels entirely inaccurate.

[Doovies]

It occurs twice... twice.

[Arukādo]

1. Play Wong
2. Play Mystique on the same location, she copies Wong's effect
3. You have now 2 Wongs at this location
4. You play an "On Reveal" card at this location
5. Wong applies it twice (2)
6. Mystique applies it twice (2)

Total: "On Reveal" effect applied 4 times

I don't see any issue there. Each card activates itself 1 time, including your Wongs who activates themselves in order when an "On Reveal" card is played.

[araisikewai]

Originally posted by Arukādo:

1. Play Wong
2. Play Mystique on the same location, she copies Wong's effect
3. You have now 2 Wongs at this location
4. You play an "On Reveal" card at this location
5. Wong applies it twice (2)
6. Mystique applies it twice (2)

Total: "On Reveal" effect applied 4 times

I don't see any issue there. Each card activates itself 1 time, including your Wongs who activates themselves in order when an "On Reveal" card is played.

But it just says twice. It doesn't say one Ongoing to happen after the other.
Ongoing is Ongoing, both are ON at the same time.

By your logic, if we Mystique + Madame Web, we should be able to move 2 cards each turn. One from Madame Web, another from Mystique. But we always only able to move 1.

[Meredith K Pseudonym]

Originally posted by araisikewai:

By your logic, if we Mystique + Madame Web, we should be able to move 2 cards each turn. One from Madame Web, another from Mystique. But we always only able to move 1.

You're describing exactly the interaction I'd expect - you get to move one card other than Madame Web, you get to move one card other than Mystique. Human Torch may be both of those things but moving him shouldn't count as both abilities being spent.

[SuitUpHewgz]

Originally posted by Arukādo:

1. Play Wong
2. Play Mystique on the same location, she copies Wong's effect
3. You have now 2 Wongs at this location
4. You play an "On Reveal" card at this location
5. Wong applies it twice (2)
6. Mystique applies it twice (2)

Total: "On Reveal" effect applied 4 times

I don't see any issue there. Each card activates itself 1 time, including your Wongs who activates themselves in order when an "On Reveal" card is played.

The issue is grammar. Words have meanings. Re-read my initial explanation. I feel like you just read the title and then responded to that without reading the rest.

As written, the interaction, if it follows basic grammar, would not work.

Again, I'm fine learning that this is how the interaction works, this is just a critique because it's a poor problem-solving-text experience, which is important in card games.

[Doovies]

Arguments based on semantics are almost pointless. You clearly understand how it operates. A change in text wouldn't benefit you.

And claiming it's a poor problem solving experience gives the playerbase far too little credit.

If it's a genuine critique, a pursuit of excellence and text verbatim is probably one the lowest on the list of things to change, but one of highest on things to improve.

If it isn't genuine, and it just bugs you: grow up lol.

[LordAnorak]

Originally posted by araisikewai:

Originally posted by Arukādo:

1. Play Wong
2. Play Mystique on the same location, she copies Wong's effect
3. You have now 2 Wongs at this location
4. You play an "On Reveal" card at this location
5. Wong applies it twice (2)
6. Mystique applies it twice (2)

Total: "On Reveal" effect applied 4 times

I don't see any issue there. Each card activates itself 1 time, including your Wongs who activates themselves in order when an "On Reveal" card is played.

But it just says twice. It doesn't say one Ongoing to happen after the other.
Ongoing is Ongoing, both are ON at the same time.

By your logic, if we Mystique + Madame Web, we should be able to move 2 cards each turn. One from Madame Web, another from Mystique. But we always only able to move 1.

If you Mystique a Madame Web in a different lane you CAN move two, one from each location. Madame Web has the limit built right into the card text: Ongoing: You can move one of your other cards away from here each turn.

Having essentially 2 Madame Webs in the same location won't magically double the card numbers that can be moved, because the card effect stipulate only 1 card can be moved per turn.

Wong doesn't have any such limiter. It specifically reads: Ongoing: Your On Reveal abilities here happen twice.

[Doovies]

Originally posted by LordAnorak:

Originally posted by araisikewai:

But it just says twice. It doesn't say one Ongoing to happen after the other.
Ongoing is Ongoing, both are ON at the same time.

By your logic, if we Mystique + Madame Web, we should be able to move 2 cards each turn. One from Madame Web, another from Mystique. But we always only able to move 1.

If you Mystique a Madame Web in a different lane you CAN move two, one from each location. Madame Web has the limit built right into the card text: Ongoing: You can move one of your other cards away from here each turn.

Having essentially 2 Madame Webs in the same location won't magically double the card numbers that can be moved, because the card effect stipulate only 1 card can be moved per turn.

Wong doesn't have any such limiter. It specifically reads: Ongoing: Your On Reveal abilities here happen twice.

This ^ it's like suggesting you can play 2 cards if you have two electro in play 🤣

Twice can not only mean two occurrences, but it's also a double in quantity.

If I have twice as many as twice the apples you have: it's quadrupled.

[araisikewai]

Originally posted by Doovies:

Twice can not only mean two occurrences, but it's also a double in quantity.

If I have twice as many as twice the apples you have: it's quadrupled.

Twice means twice.

Both Wongs are saying twice, but each Wong doesn't say they're doubling the other Ongoing. As they're only doubling On Reveal. Therefore Multiplicative logic of one Wong over the other Wong does not work (it's not 2*2).

Also it's not one Wong to active after the other Wong. The nature of Ongoing, both Wongs are active at the same time. Once an On Reveal proc'd twice, it already satisfied both cards condition. Therefore the additive logic of one Wong after the other Wong also does not work (it's not 2+2 either).

[Dodon]

The cool thing is that regardless of your argument, this is a non-issue.

Wong+Mystique has been around forever. You know how many people complain about not understanding Wong+Mystique? Like... none. Zero.

It's crazy how few people this interaction confuses. It's like they see it once and they say "oh, that's how it works, okay" and move on. Even if, for some reason, they were flabbergasted the first time it happened, they understand what it means right away after seeing it. We can intuit it very easily, and Snap has the benefit of very quick, low-stakes matches, so even those very rare people only have that problem one time and it barely matters.

[unlimitedskyuran]

Originally posted by SuitUpHewgz:

Wong's effect says On Reveal happens TWICE, it does NOT say 'an additional time,'

You do understand that then Misty + Wong would only give a total of three effect triggers instead of four?
So that you calm down and don't nitpick about words, instead of "twice" there should be "double". But aren't "twice" and "double" synonyms?

[SuitUpHewgz]

Originally posted by Doovies:

Arguments based on semantics are almost pointless. You clearly understand how it operates. A change in text wouldn't benefit you.

And claiming it's a poor problem solving experience gives the playerbase far too little credit.

If it's a genuine critique, a pursuit of excellence and text verbatim is probably one the lowest on the list of things to change, but one of highest on things to improve.

If it isn't genuine, and it just bugs you: grow up lol.

How unnecessarily combative. You really think people will listen to you if you insult them?

[Doovies]

Originally posted by SuitUpHewgz:

Originally posted by Doovies:

Arguments based on semantics are almost pointless. You clearly understand how it operates. A change in text wouldn't benefit you.

And claiming it's a poor problem solving experience gives the playerbase far too little credit.

If it's a genuine critique, a pursuit of excellence and text verbatim is probably one the lowest on the list of things to change, but one of highest on things to improve.

If it isn't genuine, and it just bugs you: grow up lol.

How unnecessarily combative. You really think people will listen to you if you insult them?

You'll be fine 🫶

You gotta be incredibly soft to consider been told to grow up is an insult 😆